[Gary Wells]

Dynojet to Dynomite Dyno Comparison of a 2011 CTS-V Coupe:


Bone stock, Vette Doctors Dynomite Dyno on 09-20-2010:
525 RWHP & 519 RWTQ


After the following mods, (9.5” lower pulley, CAI, 160˚, & Vette Doctors tune) Vette Doctors Dynomite dyno on 09-20-2010:


525 (stock) RWHP to 604.3 (modified) RWHP = 15.1% RWHP increase
519 (stock) RWTQ to 619.2 (modified) RWTQ = 19.3% RWTQ increase


The same car with the same modifications, (no other changes) on Mustang Magic’s Dynojet dyno on 10-04-2010:
556.2 RWHP
554.8 RWTQ


The Dynomite indicated 8.7% (.087) more RWHP than the Dynojet
The Dynomite indicated 11.6% (.116) more RWTQ than the Dynojet

Or:

The Dynojet indicated 13.1% (.131) less RWHP than the Dynomite
The Dynojet indicated 16.2% (.162) less RWTQ than the Dynomite

[jedhead]

My car indicated 443whp 430wtq on a dynapack and 390/382 on a dynojet with a mild tune.

Bob

[94cobra69ss396]

What correction factors did they use on both?

[Gary Wells]

Originally Posted by jedhead

My car indicated 443whp 430wtq on a dynapack and 390/382 on a dynojet with a mild tune.

Bob

OK, so I am curious, which do you believe is closer to a real RWHP & RWTQ #?

What companies dynojet and where located?
And I know whose Dynapack that was and where it is located.

[Gary Wells]

Originally Posted by 94cobra69ss396

What correction factors did they use on both?

On the Dynomite, I don't believe that they showed a correction factor, and I believe that the Dynojet was either SAE or STD.


Just my personal opinion, but Dynomite dynos read or produce #'s that are notoriously high. I know that there is some variation between different correction factors, but no where that much.

[jedhead]

Here are the dynosheets:




Corsa axle back exhaust and tuned PCM. Otherwise stock.

I expected the dynapack to read higher since the dyno is attached to the wheel hub so there is no rolling resistance, rotating mass of the wheel and tire and tire slippage. The dynojet runs on the sheet are on different dates but under similar temperatures at the same time of the day. The red graph is the tuned PCM and blue is stock. My tune is pretty mild as requested; I mainly wanted better shifting and a more responsive engine which I did get. I also used Chevron 91 Octane from the same gas station on all dyno runs.

Bob

[Gary Wells]

Those are great #'s, Bob.

[jedhead]

Originally Posted by Gary Wells

OK, so I am curious, which do you believe is closer to a real RWHP & RWTQ #?

What companies dynojet and where located?
And I know whose Dynapack that was and where it is located.

The dynojet is at Superior Automotive in Anaheim. My guess would be the dynojet since it shows a loss of 18% from the rated flywheel hp from the factory. Both runs on the dynapack was with the tuned PCM. The first run the engine was pulling timing because the tune was very aggressive and most likely optimized for 93 Octane gas. I wanted a safe tune for the engine so it runs a little fat and the timing for spark is not as aggressive. However my cam timing is as aggressive as possible without tripping error codes. Although I did not gain very much peak power, the car feels much more stronger in the lower gears since the blower bypass stay closed, bringing in the boost quicker, the throttle opens quicker and wide open in second and third. The transmissions shift a little quicker and firmer in normal mode and I no longer have the drawn out second to third shift when the transmission is cold. In sport mode the transmission shift much quicker and firmer and will make the tires break loose going into second and make the rear squirm shifting into third. Manual mode the transmission shifts very fast and very firm. I am very happy with the tune and highly recommend one.

Bob

[jedhead]

Originally Posted by Gary Wells

Those are great #'s, Bob.

I was a little surprised at the dyno numbers even on the dynojet. Most of the other dynosheet that I have seen posted on forums and youtube the STS-V is about 360whp on the dynojet and mine was 388 stock. The dealer reflashed my stock PCM a couple months before I ran the car on the dyno and the car felt much stronger after the reflash. I wish I ran the car before the reflash because I can't help but think the latest flash might have something to do with the high power output my STS-V seems to have.
I am looking forward to getting the Spectre Performance intake. I think I will show a gain of 40/32 from my previous best. I want to make sure that I am not leaning out with the intake although Shawn, my tuner, thinks I will be fine.

Bob

[Gary Wells]

Originally Posted by jedhead

I was a little surprised at the dyno numbers even on the dynojet. Most of the other dynosheet that I have seen posted on forums and youtube the STS-V is about 360whp on the dynojet and mine was 388 stock. The dealer reflashed my stock PCM a couple months before I ran the car on the dyno and the car felt much stronger after the reflash. I wish I ran the car before the reflash because I can't help but think the latest flash might have something to do with the high power output my STS-V seems to have.
I am looking forward to getting the Spectre Performance intake. I think I will show a gain of 40/32 from my previous best. I want to make sure that I am not leaning out with the intake although Shawn, my tuner, thinks I will be fine.

Bob

Did you go through D3 for your tune, or did you go directly to CAT? And if you think that the new CAI will gain 40/32 without re-adjusting the tune, this will be interesting, as I personally don't believe that any cai will net you more than 6-7 RWHP / RWTQ without a tune. And if they do a tune, they will open up more to borrow some of that HP from other areas to make it look like it all came from the cai. I know that is not probably not what you wanted to hear.